Obama '08?

And his vast experience leads you to believe he is the man that can mitigate the effects of our economic situation and make things better?

Please point out his experience in matters such as this.
What the hell, point out his experience doing anything besides campaigning for office.

No, I think his proven judgement in policy matters and his tactical and strategical skills, in combination with the vast experience of the people he's brought on board in the Cabinet and the WH and the ample Democratic majorities in Congress, will give him a fair shot.

If, that is, he shows the ambition to match this time of crisis - this is no time for incrementalism or wishy-washy compromise - and the spine in facing down hardline Republican obstructionists, conservative demagogues in the media, and the predictable corporate and institutional resistance. (The latter will show up on health care reform and financial regulation, for example - and yes, dealing with the health care/insurance problems will be tie in with dealing with the economic crisis).

Obama's great at forging unlikely relationships and winning over a broad range of people, including the centre ground people - more than any truly progressive politician of my choice would have been. But will he stand his ground against those whom he can not win over, and who will do their best to make him fail? That's actually the part I'm apprehensive about.

I suppose you could frame that as an issue of experience - is he too naive? - but I don't see his experience per se as a problem. George Bush Senior had tons of experience, and he was still a massive failure on the economy. In the end experience is just a means to achieve better judgement, and as often as not it fails. I'm fairly confident in Obama's judgement.

Understood, and we can agree that Obama has no experience other than
getting his behind closed door supporters organized and campaigning.

Pure luck is the only way our Republic can survive four years of Obamanomics.

That is interesting. BTW, I am not sure that we survived the Republican cult of corruption during the last eight years. The jury is still out.

You have it wrong. It was the Reps who marched in lockstep with Bush and his gang of thieves.

The Dems would not blindly follow a failed O administration.

O has an advantage of sorts. It is virtually impossible for him to do worse than Bush.

You have it wrong. O boy can easily do far worse damage than GW and
the democrat cult of corruption will follow and support O boy's every step.

Sorry, We’re Booked, White House Tells Obamas




John Howard, former prime minister of Australia and a longtime ally of President Bush, is spending the night there on Jan. 12,

The only plan O boy has is to stimulate the economy just enough to get himself elected to a second term in 2012.

Obama Warns Recession May 'Linger for Years'

sort of like extending a war?

What war has been extended?

wow purposeful obtuseness....a change up from the usual outright stupidity

I remembered that I was dealing with an ignorant moron.

You guys are amazing. So pork depends upon who defines it, not what it is?

Hey guys, who do you suppose will have their hands in the till when Obama starts handing out the money? Mostly the same people that did the earmarks or pork that piggybacked other bills. One could even argue that pork was more targeted and better spent than some kind of massive program with money being swept out the door.

I think we are confusing the terms, pork and earmarks. To rephrase what I said in the above:

Hey guys, who do you suppose will have their hands in the till when Obama starts handing out the money? Mostly the same people that did the earmarks that piggybacked other bills. One could even argue that earmarks were more targeted and better spent than some kind of massive pork barrel program with money being swept out the door. Perhaps earmarks could commonly be described as pork, but there is plenty of pork besides earmarks.

And if you try to argue that earmarks were totally promoted by congressmen, they actually came from the states that they represented, and if Obama intends to spend alot of money, it will be the same officials from the states that will have their hands out, and it is anybody's guess whether the resulting expenditures will be more efficiently or less efficiently spent than earmarks. My guess is worse, because when you open up the spigot of money, more spillage, and more waste is inevitable. When I worked for a corporation, and when more money was available and people were asked for more projects, Katie bar the door, anything and everything were possible, waste increased in terms of percentage of monies spent.

If O boy wants to be a successful president on the domestic front he must
adopt and implement The FairTax plan and reduce government growth.

I am in favor of the Retail Sales Tax, on one condition, the income tax is abolished. You would see an explosion of commerce in this country. Exclude housing to a certain level, and food. The infrastructure is already in place, barcoding has been perfected, states do this with little fuss, it can be done. Then all crooks, drug dealers, etc. would pay tax, how beautiful! Too bad McCain did not win, so that Huckabee could have been unleashed with that. Obama has not a clue, except more government, which is why we are in the pickle we are in, too many decades of ponzi scheming and pork barrel spending by the Deemocrats.

And who has had "more government" than your god & hero, Chicken George bu$h? The un-great command in Thief who has spent like a drunken sailor is and has been the problem for 8 long years.

He who has probably outspent almost all the other presidents combined! Hey Okie, we are hoping to discontinue king george's out of control spending spree as soon as we can get that thug out of the White House!

And see if you can talk those ponzi scheming thugs of the republican party to quit their thievery too. You bitch about it but when a republican does it everything seems to be all hunky-dory with you worshipers of one rotten political party.

First of all, Magginkat, did you get up on the wrong side of the bed today, good grief, get a grip. My god and hero is not George Bush, but Mr. Bush is a decent man, you can't take that away from him. True, Bush has spent way too much money, I challenge you to find anywhere I have ever posted that I support much of Bush's domestic policy. Obama is the next messiah, not George Bush.

Bush cannot spend money without congress authorizing it, and wake up, it is entitlement spending that is running away with it. Entitlements that Democrats created. Face the truth.

Corruption, I have not ever supported any politician shown to be clearly corrupt, not the Clintons thats for sure, and now we are about to see the Chicago politicians take over Washington. If you think we are going to sit back and take it without pointing out the total lack of experience, ineptness, and stupidity, you have another think coming. Obama is now claiming government can spend money to fix the ec0nomy, and he couldn't be more wrong.

P.S. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, propped up and failed by the likes of Frank, Dodd, Franklin Raines, and the Democrats, Obama will not fix it but instead will be an enabler of more corruption and irresponsibility.

The FairTax has been introduced into the 111th Congress as H.R. 25

O boy may be correct when his said Government is the only answer to our economic
problems because only Government can repeal the 16th & 17th amendments...

O boy made a doom & gloom speech today and his fear driven comments concerning the economy
are dragging this country down deeper and faster than anything the liberal left can blame on GW.